Legislature(2007 - 2008)BARNES 124
02/20/2008 08:30 AM House FISHERIES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HCR22 | |
| HB134 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HCR 22 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 134 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HB 134-PROTECTION OF SALMON SPAWNING WATER [Representative Johansen returned the gavel to Chair Seaton.] 9:42:56 AM CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 134, "An Act relating to conservation and protection of wild salmon production in drainages affecting the Bristol Bay Fisheries Reserve; and providing for an effective date." [The motion to adopt CSHB 134, Version 25-LS0381\M, Kane, 2/22/07, was left pending at the 2/28/07 meeting.] [The motion to adopt CSHB 134, Version 25-LS0381\O, Kane, 1/22/08, was left pending at the February 18, 2008 meeting.] CHAIR SEATON reminded the committee that public testimony is being offered on CSHB 134, Version O. 9:44:22 AM BILLY MAINES offered his support of HB 134. He expressed his belief that the penalties should be stronger, that incarceration for a violation should be included in Version O. 9:46:23 AM RON BOWERS said that he supports subsistence and the commercial fisheries, but that he is against HB 134 because it will violate the rights of private property owners and deprive Alaskans and Americans of the revenue from state and federal lands in Bristol Bay. He asked for an inventory of private land owners, including Native corporations, in the Bristol Bay region that would be affected by Version O. He then requested the creation of a funding source for reimbursement to those private landowners for the loss of revenue. 9:47:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON posed a scenario in which this is determined to be a "takings" issue and the landowners are allowed to go to court. Would this be adequate to recover any loss, he asked. MR. BOWERS responded that this would put the burden on the landowner. He said that he preferred a large reimbursement fund because many private individuals would not have the resources to pursue the legal process. REPRESENTATIVE JOHNSON offered his belief that the landowners would have a right to a portion of the permanent fund if land is taken inappropriately. CHAIR SEATON asked that Mr. Bowers clarify whether he was referring to private or corporate loss of land development revenue. MR. BOWERS responded that he was referring to Native corporations and individuals, but that he did not want to draw on the permanent fund for these payouts. SAM FORTIER, Pedro Bay Corporation, said that Pedro Bay Corporation is neutral on the development of Pebble Mine, but that the corporation strongly opposes HB 134. He said that Pedro Bay Corporation is a private landowner with investment expectations for its lands, which include the most favorable transportation route from Pebble Mine to Cook Inlet. He explained that even if the Pebble Mine is never built, this road will allow easier access and reduce the costs for goods and services to Pedro Bay. He expressed his belief that the bill does not address some of the inclusions to sulfide mining operations identified in AS 27.20.060, namely the transportation, communication, and utility routes that go along with the mine development. With the adoption of HB 134, these opportunities for development would no longer exist. REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if any other entities in Pedro Bay, specifically the local village council, have offered an opinion on HB 134. MR. FORTIER responded that the Pedro Bay Village Council is opposed to the construction of the mine, but that Pedro Bay Corporation is united with other Native corporations against HB 134. 9:54:53 AM PATRICK FLATLEY, Bristol Bay Alliance, communicated that his group will provide information on hard rock mining to any of the stakeholders in the Bristol Bay watershed, and that the Bristol Bay Alliance is urging the committee to vote in support of HB 134. 9:56:09 AM HEATH HILYARD, Business Development Manager, Alaska Supply Chain Integrators, conveyed that his company is opposed to all of the versions of HB 134. He said that he will submit written testimony at a later time. 9:57:02 AM SHARON ANDERSON reported that she is opposed to HB 134. She offered her belief that Version O is slanted more toward closing the mining industry in Alaska than protecting and conserving the anadromous fish resources. She expressed that the mining industry is closely monitored and that mining regulations require state of the art technology and monitoring. 9:58:51 AM GAIL PHILLIPS, Co-Chair, Truth About Pebble, mentioned that her written testimony will be submitted, and she reminded that the legislature is sworn to protect Alaska from unwarranted lawsuits and unlawful "takings" of lands and resources. She expressed her opposition to HB 134. 9:59:58 AM JASON BRUNE, Executive Director, Resource Development Council for Alaska, Inc., announced that Version O will have an economic impact on all Native corporations as defined by the revenue sharing section of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act (ANCSA), 43 U.S.C. § 1606 (ANCSA § 7) (i)(1)(A). He offered his belief that the state and federal permitting process is already extremely rigorous and said that he is opposed to HB 134. 10:01:52 AM NORMAN VAN VACTOR, Sno Pac Products, observed that HB 134 will protect renewable resources and that he will forward his written comments. 10:03:50 AM WASSILLIE ILUTSIK stated that HB 134 will block economic development for Native corporations. [HB 134 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|